Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:39:24 01/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 10, 2000 at 02:15:09, Ed Schröder wrote: >On January 09, 2000 at 23:13:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On January 09, 2000 at 21:10:29, Mark Young wrote: >> >>>On January 09, 2000 at 18:33:26, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >>> >>>>On January 09, 2000 at 17:43:32, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>Let's not go off the deep end here. I personally don't give a care about >>>>>his comments. Feel free to tell him to drop by ICC at any point in time he >>>>>chooses and demonstrate how badly Crafty plays in a few blitz games. He >>>>>reminds me of the "catfish" in the deep south waterways. Eat anything. Dumb >>>>>as a rock. We say "he is like a catfish, all mouth and no brains" when some- >>>>>one makes silly and easily refutable remarks... >>>>> >>>>>Kasparov is in ChessBase's pocket. However, from this point forward, since >>>>>we are going to continue to see this, I believe that I will simply choose to >>>>>say that "no more crafty versions will be available for ChessBase products". >>>>> >>>>>If it is so bad, they really don't need it anyway. If I see any future versions >>>>>on their web site, I will let my attorney do the talking. >>>> >>>>The article is poisonous and I understand your anger, but I think you are not >>>>aiming well. First of all, I can't imagine Kasparov being in anybody's pocket. >>>>Second, the heated argument about Deep Blue can easily explain the animosity >>>>towards Crafty without resorting to third parties. >>>> >>>>What I can tell you is that I keep receiving regular updates of Crafty for CB, >>>>together with positive comments about it. I don't believe in the long and >>>>sinister arm of CB, and even less in this case. >>>> >>>>Enrique >>> >>>I don't see why Bob is so upset. The comments made are pretty much accurate. >> >>Actually they are way off, and here is why: >> >> >>> >>>"Crafty is extremely strong in tactics." ....True >> >>Dead false. Try _any_ commercial program on a tactical test position, and then >>try Crafty. I have not tried to fiddle a lot with deep search extensions, and >>am usually far slower than everybody else to find a deep tactical shot. The >>King may be the best, but others like Rebel are very good. I do _not_ consider >>crafty very tactical. > >I remember Crafty solves the WAC position, key-move Rb4! Quite impressive! > Cray Blitz solved it in a couple of seconds. _that_ is tactical. Crafty takes over a minute on the quad xeon (finds it at depth 16). I don't consider that nearly so tactical. But that is only one kind of tactics (non-king-attack). In king attack type positions, I don't do very well speed-wise, but don't really spend a lot of time worrying about this yet. > > >>>"it makes positional errors and misplays some endgames" ....True >> >>It misplays fewer endgames than most commercial programs. It certainly has >>some knowledge that none of them at present are using. >> >> >> >> >>> >>>"It doesn?t understand piece mobility." ....True, but could use more >>>explaination. >> >>Dead false. I use mobility where it is important, because my bitmap stuff >>makes it totally free to do so. IE it pretty well understands good vs bad >>bishops, due to this. etc. >> >> >> >>> >>>"Crafty is a weak program compared with the best commercial chess >>>programs."....True >>> >>>I have seen no crafty results even by you that dispute those observations. Bob >>>may not like it but at this time his program is still weaker then the top >>>programs. It must be noted that bob has closed the gap in the last year, but >>>crafty is still not on par with the top commercail programs. >> >> >>I play the top commercial programs on ICC all the time, at long standard >>time controls. So far, nobody is 'killing me'. I can't think of a program >>that I am not at least breaking even with, and really can not think of one >>of those. Yes I have faster hardware. But I spent the time to make the program >>use it... >> >>But the real fly in the ointment was to say it is not playing well, then give >>a tournament where it finished in second place above the programs the guy was >>praising... and in that tournament it was on _equal_ hardware. >> >>You might notice one thing in my writing here and elsewhere. I don't run down >>other programs. Because I _know_ that every chess program represents a heck of >>a lot of work. De Gorter obviously doesn't know much about it at all... and >it shows... > >It's just the opinion of one man. And Crafty has proven itself since >times, no? > >Ed Yes.. but it is the sort of thing that should not be written about _any_ program. Much less a freeware program in the context of a review of "commercial" chess engines.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.